Google Chrome beta only for Windows, not Mac OS X or Linux
Tim Finin, 8:06am 2 September 2008I just noticed that the beta version of Google Chrome to be released sometime today will only be available for Microsoft Windows. 
Hopefully, the MAC OS X and Linux versions will follow without too much delay.
Update: You can sign up to get more information on other releases here:
Related posts:
Ebiquity Blog
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:52 am
Booooooohhh, c’mon boooooh
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:52 am
just realized this too. sad face.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Sad, but I still believe that will be good for GNU/Linux, in long term, if it could brake the tandem Windows/IExplorer.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Major bummer!
HISSS!!!
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:02 pm
What a JOKE. First gmail totally sucks, crashes constantly, fails at proper labelling. Now chrome only for windows? Screw google. google = the new microsoft
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Macs are second class citizens despite google using their native webkit. f-google.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Well, that was disappointing. Google-schmoogle, I won’t use weendoze even if you make it usable (which is unlikely).
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Google = Fascism! Open Source Browser, and Apple WebKit=
1. Chrome for Mac
2. Chrome for Linux
3. Chrome for Windows…
Google sold out!
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Quit complaining. Google is putting out the windows binaries first because the market share is still majority Windows.
Give them less than a month and they will have binaries for Linux and OSX.
I am disappointed that they have not put out the source code for the browser yet, which technically does not violate the BSD license, but is annoying
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:14 pm
That sux Google! An open source browser but not yet for Linux??? Linux and Mac should of had it first! There shouldnt even be a Windows version. To hell with Microsoft!!!!!!!!!!!
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Well, webkit is a fork of KHTML…
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Why is everyone so up in arms over this? First off, Google has said that they will be releasing a Linux version. So to everyone claiming, “Oh, great, it’s windows only”, do a bit of research, please. Secondly, I highly doubt OSX will be left behind. This is Webkit, _and_ opensource. You’ll see an OSX release, be patient. And to the person who said that webkit is a Mac thing… Please, do some research. It’s a KDE thing (Konqueror), that Apple forked. The two teams have been working together on WebKit every since.
So, yeah, it sucks that their releases for linux and OSX weren’t sync’ed with the windows one. But, it’s hardly important.
Plus, firefox works fine on all three. Oh, but you wanted the latest greatest tech spoon fed to you right now, didn’t you?
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Macs are and should be considered 4th class citizens. They come after PCs, pond scum, and the crud on the bottom of my shoes.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:03 pm
WebKit is not “native Mac”. WebKit is a cross-platform renderer that’s based on KDE’s KHTML, and that just happens to be used in the default browser on Mac and has had lots and lots of improvements by Apple. They will release versions for Linux and Mac soon enough. Besides, I’d rather have a working version in a week than a broken, annoyingly bugged version yesterday.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:03 pm
“If it work on the most unstable system (a.k.a. Windows), it will work everywhere else.” — Beta tester
JK
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:55 pm
FYI, WebKit isn’t just native to Mac OS X, it was originally written for Linux and ported by Apple for Safari.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:21 pm
@r: apple’s ‘native webkit’ was a software fork of KDE’s KHTML library. Your Mac is a second class citizen when it comes to beta testing sure, cause windows has a much larger market share. Chrome should be out for mac and linux as soon as it’s out of beta, as the developers said they have focused on making Chrome cross-platform since the beginning of the project.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Thanks, Mogul! Someone who’s done a little research B4 speaking! While Google isn’t the 2nd coming they at least try to be decent. I don’t want to wait for Linux version but happily will. They decided to continue to support Mozilla by paying large amount of $ to be default browser. Didn’t try to destroy FF like MS would do with FUD
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:58 pm
was waiting all day for CHROME in Ireland, finally it arrives and I cant get it coz im a MACer, Hopefully the rumours of the google OS wil make it all worth while though. I’ve been reading up on chrome as much as possible and it looks like it’s gonna be the only browser to really support Web 2.0
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:28 pm
First come to scratch than comes the work of art….
I test it on my friend’s old PC and rocks
imagine in ours great mac…..
peace
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Google = Cool
Mac = Cool
PC = (enough said).
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Come on Chrome is based on webkit and this java rendering speed improvement and sandbox features would take a monkey 3 hours to code. Not impressed whatsoever. All i ask is they stop violating open source licensing and release the source right away. Releasing a binary before source is not only rude to the people they are borrowing code from its a violation of a few laws.
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:11 am
i am using Linux so would appreciate if chrome is for Linux to try it out coz I don’t wont to install windows
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:43 am
Jesus christ you people, just cos its open source doesn’t mean it’s gonna have an immediate Linux release. The terms are not interchangable!
And good on those who researched before flaming Google.
Boo for he who posted the article with such spin that it CAUSED the rucous.
But pats for him, for the correction.
Him or her. Whichever.
September 3rd, 2008 at 8:48 am
Search:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=google+chrome+linux&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=
First link:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=&articleId=9114018&taxonomyId=&intsrc=kc_feat
How about Chrome for Linux? You’re even more out of luck than people running Steve Jobs’ operating system. The e-mail notification for Mac users — but not for those running Linux — is more than a hint. Chrome’s developer notes spell out the bad news: “There is no [emphasis in original] working Chromium-based browser on Linux,” says the build documentation, in red type within a bordered box, no less.
That must mean they’re serious about “no” meaning, well, “no.”
–
September 3rd, 2008 at 8:53 am
Has anyone ever noticed that everything Google is BETA. For God’s sake how long this google chat or whatever it’s called in Beta stage ? Like forever ?!!
Not releasing this for Mac in the same time they released it for Windows just tells you something. I left fucking Windows and I will never ever go back, screw that shitty operating system I had enough of it. Since I started using OS X, I have nothing but joy. And all those Windows fanboys… they can shit whatever they want, they all want Macs… it’s just they can not afford one and that’s what makes them mad. Go and find a second job, it doesn’t have to be forever, just until you earn enough money to afford one. And then you’ll maybe… maybe, just maybe… stop shitting about these wonderful machines.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:38 pm
unthugh seems to be the usual brainwashed hardcore mac user: he feels offended even when nobody says a bad word about Mac. The “windows fanboys” don’t give a shit about mac (that means, they don’t care) but he needs to believe the contrary, that people talk about his “joy” (he was lucky to not have switched to MacOS when the version 9 or previous, those pieces of horrendous operative systems) even if it’s for bad. “Hey, look here, I’m a Mac user, pay atention, even if it’s to stone me, don’t ignore me”. Something like that. A trauma from the childhood? Who knows, but it’s really a very strange behaviour. Regarding the real subject of this article, that Chrome will only be successful if people start using web applications massively and this browser handles with them much, much better than Explorer, Safari or the ones based on Gecko.
September 3rd, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Et seem to me that the source code are released. http://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/
September 3rd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
… guys didnt u hear?? it was a fuckup its not even supposed to have been released yet there was a leak within the company, they had to release it early…. its expected release is actually like 3 weeks from now or something… be patient… get pissed after the real release
September 3rd, 2008 at 9:57 pm
google = skynet
September 3rd, 2008 at 10:31 pm
“First gmail totally sucks, crashes constantly, fails at proper labelling” – you are crazy man, and with very sick brain…go to doctor, it is the best you can make for yourself
September 4th, 2008 at 3:40 am
I think Google Chrome brings some good ideas to the table that will surely be picked up by Firefox and Safari. I think I read that was their goal and I don’t see any reason why it won’t be reached.
I am ALL for press and/or software against IE . Right now I make my sites on a Mac, test in Firefox and Safari. Everything takes maybe a week, then I spend the next week writing workarounds for fucking IE users. I am fine waiting for Google to get Chrome right, this is one more browser I have to support.
IE = Hacked POS
September 4th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Google Chrome is Safari 4. So if you want a version that has a nicer UI then download the dev version of Safari 4 that was released on June 11th, 2008. The js speed improvements, the ability to move tabs around, and the ability to save pages as applications are all there.
September 5th, 2008 at 4:36 am
“web developer”, I am a web developer too, and I had spent some hours also debugging sites so fucking Mac users can view them like they are meant to be viewed. If you need one week to fix a site for IE that means you did something terribly wrong the week before. Explorer 7 has its faults, some bugs (like other browsers have, let me say), but it renders pages pretty decently. In fact, the pages I do look almost perfect in all browsers I develop for: Firefox and Explorer 7/Windows (I’m not crazy enough to have installed Safari on Windows), Firefox and Safari/Mac, by experience I know that pages will look in Firefox linux like they look in Windows or Mac (apart of the fonts). Maybe you have your problems with Explorer 6, like we all have, but keep in mind that Explorer 6 is outdated, like outdated are Firefox 1 and Safari 1. Are you developing for these browsers too? It would be a nightmare. The fact that still many people use Explorer 6 doesn’t make this browser worst than it already is, or the fact that nobody use Safari 1 (well, almost nobody use Safari 3) doesn’t make it better. There have been terrible browsers since they exist (do I have to mention Netscape 6? Netscape didn’t shoot their own foot with this crap, but bombed it), Explorer 6 is not the worst we have had to face it. And knowing a few tricks you don’t need to spend a whole week to fix a page for Explorer 6. If you had to develop in times of Nestacpe 4 and Explorer 4/5, you would consider the actual scenario as heaven.
September 5th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO MAC VERSION??/ THAT’S A BAD SIGN! BAD GOOGLE!
September 5th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
I’m a die hard Mac user. Always have been , always will be. And this is FINE with me. Let the A-hole PC Windows users work out the bugs. Let them have all the crashes and the freeze ups. Let Google fix these problems. And then, let them release a clean, better working version for the people that can make a smart computer choice and not just got along with the masses. The Mac User!
September 6th, 2008 at 12:29 am
Oh, for real.
Google is putting out a Linux distro in a month or so. The people here complaining about lack of Linux support are nuts. There will be Chrome for Linux, sooner rather than later. In the meantime, what’s wrong with Firefox?
As for Macs, really, I could care less.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:09 am
@Pere As a “fucking Mac user” and a “web developer” I take offence from your above comments, and obvious ignorance.
Please, for the love of all that is just and true, surf over the W3C and read some of the /agreed web standards/ that /all browsers/, excluding /Microsoft Internet Explorer/ (with the expection of IE8b, which still has woeful support compared to it’s compeitors) that you, as a web developer, should be coding to.
If you page does not render correctly in Safari 3, you must not be adhereing to the web standards. Yes, I’ll admit, there are some bugs in Safari 3 when it comes to standards. Noticably the lack of advanced CSS3 support, but that is both to be expected and almost a given. Hence Safari 4′s woeful implementation of SVG animation in the developer preview in order to pass acid3 test. (to which chrome, sadly, being webkit based, will suffer the same fate until further notice).
However, the amount of standard lax in WebKit is nothing compared to the amount of standards lax in Microsoft Internet Explorer 7. Want proof? A standards based browser should at least pass the acid2 test by now, which FF3, Safari 3, Opera 9.5 and I’ll asume (being webkit based) Chrome do. However, IE7 does not. Check it out: acid2.acidtests.org
I do not understand why web developers believe that if a page renders in IE, it must be right. Have you even considered it might be your code that is the problem? No of course not. You would never consider that.
However, to prove the point, please submit your pages to one of the many W3C complaint valdiators, I would love to see how many errors you produce.
To prove my point, when I develop a website (with the exception of my blog, which I have just thrown out on the web using iWeb because I have more important things to do with my time [read, I'm lazy and do not feel like developing a blog and podcast interface]) I do it in the following order:
Develop valid w3c code.
Preview it in Opera. Look for any problems (the developer preview of Opera is the most standards complaint browser out there, so there tends to be very little). If it works in Opera, it tends to be standards complaint. Of course, Presto isn’t perfect. So if something doesn’t work right, I just remove that function and add a nice rewrite so that’ll play nice.
Now then, the work arounds part. Spend 5 minutes working on some of the undeveloped features for the public release of Opera. Spend 5 minutes working on the same thign for Safari 4. Spend 10 minutes working on Safari 3. Spend 10 minutes working on the iPhone version of Safari. Spend 10 minutes working on Firefox 3.
And by working on, I mean looking for parts of the code that do not render correctly, and some kind of condition, usually a php() useragent tester, to rewrite the revelevent pieces of the code.
Generally speaking, I’m not too ambitous, and I do not require a full rewrite of the stylesheet/page in order to compenstate for the above browsers shortcomings. And by doing this, I can usally quite easily isolate the problem with other, even more minor, browsers such as Konq.
And then finally, I will spend approximately 2 weeks attempting to get the page working on IE7. Most of that is writing functions to prerender SVG images. (SVG images are a godsent if you know how to use them! Ever thought about a dynamic map of the EvE galaxy? No problem! (Provided you have a decent understanding of vector manuplation, which I do.
).
And then, I release the website to the public, and get numours complaints about how it doesn’t look right on IE6. So, in order to be nice to that wee browser, I simply put another PHP rule in front of it that spits out a nice message saying that Internet Explorer 6 is not supported, please upgrade your browser. If you would still like to continue…
Oh yes, and the biggest problem with this is making all these fixes, and whatnot, and still remaining true to standards. It causes a real headache where you have completely stripped down a section of code that works PERFECTLY in every single browser, but no matter how hard you try, you cannot make it work without doing and IE hax, which would invalidate your code and prevent you from placing that nice “W3C valid code” sticker on your page.
The problems generally occur when a browser does not handle a markup tag correctly, or in the case of IE7, at all.
I believe your problem is that you are developing for Internet Explorer first and foremost, working to bug which, Firefox, being a major compeditor to Internet Explorer and presistantly trying to “win users over” will emulate.
Safari does not emulate these bugs. It assumes that developers will actually follow W3C standards.
Opera, even more so than Safari.
In fact, if web standards were adhered to by Internet Explorer, we wouldn’t be stuck in a rutt when it comes to web technologies. Tell me, what major development have you seen recently, and actually been able to USE? SVG? Nope. IE7 does not support (ignore the fact you can get a third party plugin) CSS2.1? Nope, IE7 does not support properly. Flash? Hmm… bloated, over complicated, and almost every application I have seen can be done better in AJAX, with the exceptions of flash movies, also, it is 3rd party.
IE might be de facto, but it certeinaly isn’t a good standard.
I look forward to Chrome wiping the floor with IE’s market share, cause then FINALLY, I will be able to be confident that most of my users can actually frelling view my page correctly.
Until then, I am tempted to completely ignore IE and refuse to support it at all.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
NightKhaos: thanks. I was just about to right a long list of all the standards issues in IE6 and above. You saved me a lot of time by touching on a couple of issues. I develop all my sites to be CSS based and W3C validated with Safari 2+, IE6+, and FF2+. The rest fall into place if they work there most of the time. I do this because a lot of my sites are University sites that require Section 508 and W3C validation to be passed off to the client. Much of academia still uses IE6, doesn’t that suck! Maybe Google Chrome could pump some of those advertising dollars there. Make it, the serious persons browser or something like that. lol
Pere: I stand by my statement that IE = Hacked POS!
Jeff: After looking at Google Chrome, I would have to agree that Safari 4 has all the features that Google Chrome has and had them before Google Chrome. Safari 4 also does look a bit cleaner. I guess Apple is doing what they have done forever in trying not to release there software until it is ready.
Maybe it is an even more involved scheme by Apple to repackage Safari behind another company that Windows users trust more. After all, most Windows users are corporations that have trapped themselves in the Windows platform by always buying the cheapest thing and not being brave enough to look at the long term cost and moral savings of switching to a better platform. I digress, Windows users or corporations trust big rich companies such as Google.
September 8th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Facism?
Grow up.
September 9th, 2008 at 5:13 am
@web developer: No problem. I have fun dealing with web developers who code for IE, and how it would be easier if they simplied their code considerably, and compiled with standards.
Of course, when developing AJAX dynamic pages (as I do), less complex is sometimes not an option. But the worse thing I think any developer can do is revert to Flash or Java because they cannot work how to do it JavaScript/PHP/MySQL. (or equivlent).
Yes, I agree that the problem is big corperations, and education insitutions, invest to much money into Microsoft based systems and then cannot afford to migrate. One of things i wish to do is provide progressive migration tools. Some technologies from Microsoft are bother interpolable and actually well thought out, such as Microsoft Exchange Servers. Sure, it’s not the most effiecent, and probably not most secure or cheapest system on the market, but it works, and it can be used by a lot of technologies. Including Snow Leopard, the iPhone, etc.
Mac’s tend to be easier to maintain than PCs, and easier for the power user (standard UNIX based VTs), and using servers with FreeBSD which is renound for it’s stablity are also valid options.
It is my opionion that when developing an IT infrastructive it is nieve to think that you can stick to one system. Different applications require different enviroments. For this reason, Windows in Corperations will never go away completely, but I do like to think that one day we can see a viable competitor.
Then again, I may be dreaming. Just like that dream I had last night of all IT profesisonals declaring that they will update to IE7 and make my life easier.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
If they had released the linux / macOS versions first the whole thing would have gone down in the eyes of the public as some geeky crap they don’t feel related to…. when the windows version would have come out, the average joe wouldn’t have bothered to even look into it, the average joe doesn’t really like to get informed, and if it seems like chrome is an alien geeky app then in the eyes of the voting majority it probably is…
I doubt google pushed the windows release first in order to make more $$$$ than the thing deserves, I think it was rather fear of having a dramatical $$$$ and image loss.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
oh MACers… ‘i made a smart choice I must defile anyone who tells me how I could have better spent my $1500 on my shiny white trendstation with the neon pink case and proprietary os/hardware.’ Am i saying Windows is better? No. It’s most senses it is worse. But not much worse (Except IE, which is awful).
GNU/linux is the only smart choice to be made. A more involved awareness of your computer and OS and infinitely greater computer freedom. And it can run fast on most anything.
September 19th, 2008 at 11:35 am
I have not read everything here
I want it so bad … Its such an awesome app!
But of what i have read I agree !! Google should have brought out chrome for linux and mac os first! But now i don’t care about that .. I would just like to see some release dates please
IRE
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Well, the fact that Mac is now based on Linux means that the releases for Mac and Linux should be pretty much in sync, or at the very least be released in short succession, not to mention Webkit being native to both =)
November 5th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
There’s a TestShell build available at http://securityandthe.net/2008/11/05/chrome-testshell-build-for-macos-x/
It’s not the full GUI yet, but you can get an idea of how far the Google engineers have come so far. The renderer is working, and about 50% of the tests are running.